Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Ma's Inaugural Speech: a look

I've decided to go over Ma's inaugural address. Most of these insights, including all of the translation stuff (make your own judgment about the good faith of the English translators), belong to others; I have only borrowed them....(Ma's speech in Chinese, English). It begins:

Taiwan's RenaissanceHeads of State of Our Diplomatic Allies, Distinguished Guests, Overseas Compatriots, My Fellow Taiwanese, and Dear Friends in front of a Television Set or Computer: Good Morning!

I. Historical Significance of the Second Turnover of Power

Earlier this year on March 22, through the presidential election of the Republic of China, the people changed the course of their future. Today we are here not to celebrate the victory of a particular party or individual, but to witness Taiwan pass a historic milestone.

Taiwan's democracy has been treading down a rocky road, but now it has finally won the chance to enter a smoother path. During that difficult time, political trust was low, political maneuvering was high, and economic security was gone. Support for Taiwan from abroad had suffered an all-time low. Fortunately, the growing pains of Taiwan's democracy did not last long compared to those of other young democracies. Through these growing pains, Taiwan's democracy matured as one can see by the clear choice the people made at this critical moment. The people have chosen clean politics, an open economy, ethnic harmony, and peaceful cross-strait relations to open their arms to the future.

After opening by saying the election result isn't about one party, Ma immediately moves to hack on the DPP. The opening lines are basically a campaign speech -- the points Ma makes were all talking points during the election, and the rankest of rank hypocrisy. The KMT is by far the dirtier of the two parties ("Clean politics"); and it created the system of ethnic divide-n-rule politics ("ethnic harmony"). Cross strait relations have been entirely peaceful under Chen (the only cross strait fighting took place in the Chiang era), even if China doesn't like him, and Taiwan's economy is one of the most open in the world. Ma is of course referring to DPP restrictions on economic exchanges with China, restrictions that are routine for countries bordering China.

Note that also there is no positive nod to the previous administration for its many accomplishments. This is completely graceless moment for both parties -- the DPP stayed away from the inaugural. Neither party looks very big-hearted here -- but it must have been a bitter pill to swallow for the Greens, to see Ma, who carved out a career fighting Taiwan's democratization, heading up the very democracy whose existence he put so much effort into suppressing. Cool note: a reference to computers and online viewing right there in the opening remarks! Onward...

Above all, the people have rediscovered Taiwan's traditional core values of benevolence, righteousness, diligence, honesty, generosity and industriousness. This remarkable experience has let Taiwan become "a beacon of democracy to Asia and the world." We, the people of Taiwan, should be proud of ourselves. The Republic of China is now a democracy respected by the international community.

Yet we are still not content. We must better Taiwan's democracy, enrich its substance, and make it more perfect. To accomplish this, we can rely on the Constitution to protect human rights, uphold law and order, make justice independent and impartial, and breathe new life into civil society. Taiwan's democracy should not be marred by illegal eavesdropping, arbitrary justice, and political interference in the media or electoral institutions. All of us share this vision for the next phase of political reform.

The relentless flow of hypocrisy continues -- political interference in electoral institutions? Last time I checked, it was the KMT controlled legislature that was holding up the budget to attempt to gain control of the Central Election Commission (CEC). As for Ma's remarks on civil society....

On the day of Taiwan's presidential election, hundreds of millions of ethnic Chinese worldwide watched the ballot count on TV and the Internet. Taiwan is the sole ethnic Chinese society to complete a second democratic turnover of power. Ethnic Chinese communities around the world have laid their hopes on this crucial political experiment. By succeeding, we can make unparalleled contributions to the democratic development of all ethnic Chinese communities. This responsibility is ours to fulfill.

Some points on the language here. Ma uses "zhonghwa minzu" and related terms in this speech. The DPP did not use those terms -- as part of its goal of building a real civil society, a real nation, the DPP did not use ethnic terminology to refer to status of Taiwanese -- it used "guomin" (= citizens). Ma's construction of Taiwan as a polity peopled by ethnic Chinese society is a massive step backwards for the construction of a nation-state with a civil society here that is independent of ethnicity. Perhaps another hidden meaning of the constant referencing of Singapore becomes clear -- Singapore is a multi-ethnic society, predominately Chinese, in which the Chinese basically run the show. There's even a nifty little analogue between the Taiwanese and their admixture of aboriginal physical and cultural traits, and the Peranakan of Singapore.

Further down the English term "subethnic groups" is used. That's outrageous. The reference to Taiwan as an "ethnic Chinese" society is a clear denigration of the aborigines and of those who see themselves as "Taiwanese" rather than "Chinese." It also places them in subordinate position relative to the dominant Han. There's more of this...

II. Mission of the New Era

The new administration's most urgent task is to lead Taiwan through the daunting challenges from globalization. The world economy is changing profoundly, and newly emerging countries are arising rapidly. We must upgrade Taiwan's international competitiveness and recover lost opportunities. The uncertainty of the current global economy poses as the main challenge to the revitalization of Taiwan's economy. Yet, we firmly believe that, with right policies and steadfast determination, our goals are within our grasp.

Islands like Taiwan flourish in an open economy and wither in a closed one. This has been true throughout history. Therefore, we must open up and deregulate the economy to unleash the vitality of the private sector. This will strengthen Taiwan's comparative advantages. Taiwan's enterprises should be encouraged to establish themselves at home, network throughout the Asia-Pacific region, and position themselves globally. Taiwan's labor force must learn to adapt to rapid technological changes and industrial restructuring. Our youth must develop character, a sense of civic duty, global perspectives and lifelong learning capabilities. All forms of political interference in education must be eradicated. In this era of globalization, the government must satisfy the basic needs of the underprivileged and create opportunities for them to develop. While pursuing growth, we must seek environmental sustainability for Taiwan and the rest of the world.

Some translation issues -- "this has been true throughout history" in Chinese actually says it is an "iron law of history."

Another KMT hot-button issue was the DPP's reforms of the colonialist educational system implemented by the KMT -- this was glossed as "political interference in education" in the KMT lexicon. In other words, this tastes like another hack on the DPP...

The new administration must also restore political ethics to regain the people's trust in the government. We will endeavor to create an environment that is humane, rational and pluralistic one that fosters political reconciliation and co-existence. We will promote harmony among sub-ethnic groups and between the old and new immigrants, encourage healthy competition in politics, and respect the media's monitoring of the government and freedom of the press.

"Sub-ethnic groups." Scratch Ma, and you find a Han chauvinist of the old school? The scary part is the hint here that the Presidency might well unleash Ma Ying-jeou son of crazed ROC nationalist Ma Ho-ling, not Ma Ying-jeou, pragmatist and globalist. Word has it this speech is in large part the work of Su Chi, who is now a key player in the new administration.

The new administration will push for clean politics and set strict standards for the integrity and efficiency of officials. It also will provide a code for the interaction between the public and private sectors to prevent money politics. I hope every civil servant will keep in mind: "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." The KMT will honor its sincere commitment to accountability in governance. The new government will be for all the people, remain non-partisan and uphold administrative neutrality. The government will not stand in the way of social progress, but rather serve as the engine that drives it.

Historical note: As I recall, Lord Acton's famous dictum was actually formulated as an argument for atheism against papal infallibility, since an absolutely powerful pope would be absolutely corrupt. Perhaps Ma is warning the civil service -- or perhaps he is announcing his new policy (Go for it! Be corrupt!). It is hard to imagine how the KMT will foster clean politics....

As President of the Republic of China, my most solemn duty is to safeguard the Constitution. In a young democracy, respecting the Constitution is more important than amending it. My top priority is to affirm the authority of the Constitution and show the value of abiding by it. Serving by example, I will follow the letter and the spirit of the Constitution, especially the separation of powers. We must ensure that the government is based on the rule of law. The Executive Yuan must answer to the Legislative Yuan. The Judiciary must guarantee the rule of law and protect human rights. The Examination Yuan must make the civil service sound. The Control Yuan must redress mistakes by the government and censure malfeasance by civil servants. All told, we must take this opportunity to re-establish a robust constitutional tradition.

No mention, of course, that it was the KMT controlled legislature that impaired the function of the Yuans -- by holding up bills in the Legislative Yuan, killing budgets, and blocking DPP appointments. The Control Yuan, responsible for the auditing function, had a backlog of 20,000 cases last time I checked, because the KMT blocked the DPP Control Yuan appointments.

Ma here is also taking a hack at the DPP -- "respecting the Consitution is more important than amending it." The DPP's goal was Constitutional reform. Here Ma is signaling that there will be none in his tenure. But irrespective of one's politics, the ROC constitution was never meant to be more than the candy coating over a one-party state. It needs plenty of change.

Taiwan has to be a respectable member of the global village. Dignity, autonomy, pragmatism and flexibility should be Taiwan's guiding principles when developing foreign relations. As a world citizen, the Republic of China will accept its responsibilities in promoting free trade, nonproliferation, anti-global warming measures, counter-terrorism, humanitarian aid, and other global commons. Taiwan must play a greater role in regional cooperation. By strengthening economic relations with its major trading partners, Taiwan can better integrate itself in East Asia and contribute more to the region's peace and prosperity.

Here Ma uses all the right words the US and international financial interests want to hear. Can he deliver?

We will strengthen bilateral relations with the United States, our foremost security ally and trading partner. Taiwan will continue to cherish its diplomatic allies and honor its commitments to them. We will expand cooperation with like-minded countries. On top of that, we will rationalize our defense budget and acquire necessary defensive weaponry to form a solid national defense force. At the same time, we are committed to cross-strait peace and regional stability. The Republic of China must restore its reputation in the international community as a peace-maker.

More sweets for the US. And another sly hack at the DPP -- "restoring" the reputation the ROC had as a peacemaker -- because, by inference, it was all troublemaker under Chen. As if the ROC was ever viewed by anyone as a "peacemaker." Further -- it is China that is the threat. And sure enough, there's no mention of that -- PRC missiles and military, all gone. No mention of course that it was the KMT-controlled legislature that hung up the purchase of "necessary weaponry" for years during the Chen Administration...

I sincerely hope that the two sides of the Taiwan Strait can seize this historic opportunity to achieve peace and co-prosperity. Under the principle of "no unification, no independence and no use of force," as Taiwan's mainstream public opinion holds it, and under the framework of the ROC Constitution, we will maintain the status quo in the Taiwan Strait. In 1992, the two sides reached a consensus on "one China, respective interpretations." Many rounds of negotiation were then completed, spurring the development of cross-strait relations. I want to reiterate that, based on the "1992 Consensus," negotiations should resume at the earliest time possible. As proposed in the Boao Forum on April 12 of this year, let's "face reality, pioneer a new future, shelve controversies and pursue a win-win solution." This will allow us to strike a balance as each pursues its own interests. The normalization of economic and cultural relations is the first step to a win-win solution. Accordingly, we are ready to resume consultations. It is our expectation that, with the start of direct charter flights on weekends and the arrival of mainland tourists in early July this year, we will launch a new era of cross-strait relations.

The 1992 Consensus was a fiction, but if both sides agree to use it as a framework, then it exists.

We will also enter consultations with mainland China over Taiwan's international space and a possible cross-strait peace accord. Taiwan doesn't just want security and prosperity. It wants dignity. Only when Taiwan is no longer being isolated in the international arena can cross-strait relations move forward with confidence. We have taken note that Mr. Hu Jintao has recently spoken on cross-strait relations three times: first, in a conversation of March 26 with US President George W. Bush on the "1992 Consensus"; second, in his proposed "four continuations" on April 12 at the Boao Forum; and third, on April 29 when he called for "building mutual trust, shelving controversies, finding commonalities despite differences, and creating together a win-win solution" across the Taiwan Strait. His views are very much in line with our own. Here I would like to call upon the two sides to pursue reconciliation and truce in both cross-strait and international arenas. We should help and respect each other in international organizations and activities. In light of our common Chinese heritage, people on both sides should do their utmost to jointly contribute to the international community without engaging in vicious competition and the waste of resources. I firmly believe that Taiwan and mainland China are open minded enough to find a way to attain peace and co-prosperity.

Fine points: Hu of China is "Mr. Hu" but Bush of the US is "President Bush." Heh. Then there is "the common Chinese heritage" -- unless you're an aborigine, I suppose. Ma thinks of himself as the President of a "Chinese" polity and not as the head of a multiethnic nation-state where everyone is a citizen. For Ma and his crowd, "ethnic harmony" appears to mean subordination of all ethnic groups to Han supremacy. The State Department congratulated Ma thusly:

We congratulate Ma Ying-jeou on his inauguration. We look forward to working with Taiwan’s new leaders and maintaining the vibrancy of our economic and people-to-people relationship.

We welcome initiatives to reduce tension in the Taiwan Strait. As President Bush said after the March vote, “the election provides a fresh opportunity for both sides to reach out and engage one another in peacefully resolving their differences.”

Two other translation points to make: the English text says "our common Chinese heritage" but the Chinese is explicit -- the people on the two sides of the Strait both belong to the Chinese race" (兩岸人民同屬中華民族).The second translation issue is even more interesting. Entirely dropped from the English text is the very next sentence, which says 中華民族智慧之高 which translates "the great intelligence/wisdom" of the Chinese race." As I noted, Ma's thinking treads the well-worn path of Han chauvinism in which other ethnicities are arranged in order below the dominant and wisely benevolent Han. The DPP, by contrast, offered "proto-state to state" and "partnership" with all the original peoples. As you read Ma's comments on the great Chinese people, recall the prominence of aborigines and aboriginal themes in Ma's election adverts, like this one in which everyone in the top row with Ma and Siew is an aborigine.

Yet the original people of the island have simply vanished from Ma's speech.... at this moment a pro-KMT aboriginal legislator stormed out of the speech and denounced this phraseology, pointing out that the aborigines in Taiwan have been here longer than the formulaic 5,000 years of Chinese civilization.

In resolving cross-strait issues, what matters is not sovereignty but core values and way of life. We care about the welfare of the 1.3 billion people of mainland China, and hope that mainland China will continue to move toward freedom, democracy and prosperity for all the people. This would pave the way for the long-term peaceful development of cross-strait relations.

"...what matters is not soveriegnty..." Sovereignty, according to Ma, is not important. With that line he throws away two decades of policy work by Lee Teng-hui and Chen Shui-bian. Further, during his campaign, Ma promised to safeguard the sovereignty of Taiwan and the right of the people to choose -- but hey, now that he's in power, all that disappears. It's "not important." His own words. As Taiwan News observed:

For example, one media reported that Ma mentioned Taiwan 50 times and the Republic of China only nine times, but in none of these nearly 60 references did the new head of state commissioned by our 23 million people acknowledge that either Taiwan or the ROC was "a sovereign and independent country," which he reaffirmed repeatedly during his campaign to ease concerns that his new government would "sell out Taiwan."

In addition, Ma made absolutely no mention of the principle, endorsed by himself and his party in media advertisements March 15, that "Taiwan's future must be decided by the Taiwan people alone."

This omission is even more disturbing in light of his claim that "the decisive factor in the resolution of the cross-strait issue is not the dispute over sovereignty but the way of life and core values."

On the contrary, the question of sovereignty is not a dispute over ownership of a piece of land but the right of a people organized in a state to make the fundamental decisions on their national future, including whether they wish to end their independent existence and affiliate with another state.

The fundamental issue between democratic Taiwan and the authoritarian PRC is precisely over the right of the Taiwan people to make their own decision or, in other words, over Beijing's abject refusal to acknowledge the "people's sovereignty" of the 23 million Taiwan people.

And if we don't have sovereignty, we don't really have democracy, do we? As Hong Kong is sadly finding out.... So what "core values" is Ma referring to? Dollars to donuts, it's that shared Han supremacy...or, as Feiren pointed out in the comments, the Confucian values he indexed as Taiwan having rediscovered.

The damage from the recent earthquake in Sichuan was shocking. All Taiwanese have expressed deep concern and offered immediate emergency assistance. We offer our deepest condolences to the earthquake victims and pay homage to the rescue workers. May the reconstruction of the affected area be completed at the earliest time possible!

III. Taiwan's Legacy and Vision

Upon being sworn in, I had an epiphany about the significance of accepting responsibility for the 23 million people of Taiwan. Although I have never felt so honored in my life, this is the heaviest responsibility that I have ever shouldered. Taiwan is not my birthplace, but it is where I was raised and the resting place of my family. I am forever grateful to society for accepting and nurturing this post-war immigrant. I will protect Taiwan with all my heart and resolutely move forward. I'll do my very best!

For over four centuries, this island of ours has welcomed waves of immigrants, nurturing and sheltering us all. It has provided us, our children and grandchildren, and the generations to come a safe haven. With its lofty mountains and vast oceans, Taiwan has invigorated us in mind and spirit. The cultural legacies we inherited over time not only survive on this land, but flourish and evolve, creating a pluralistic and vigorous human landscape.

The Republic of China was reborn on Taiwan. During my presidency, we will celebrate the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Republic of China. This democratic republic, the very first in Asia, spent a short 38 years on the Chinese mainland, but has spent nearly 60 years in Taiwan. During these last six decades, the destinies of the Republic of China and Taiwan have been closely intertwined. Together, the two have experienced times good and bad. On the jagged path toward democracy, the ROC has made great strides. Dr. Sun Yat-sen's dream for a constitutional democracy was not realized on the Chinese mainland, but today it has taken root, blossomed and borne fruit in Taiwan.

Ma has talked many times throughout this speech about democracy. His own opposition to it is a matter of public record, but he does not refer to his past here, nor does he thank the opposition he defeated for driving democratization here in Taiwan. Instead Ma links the idea of democracy back to Sun Yat-sen, as if the democracy movement here from the 1950s on never existed. Graceless.

On the other hand, you can read the reference to "for over four centuries" as a reference to Taiwan's 400 years of history, a common phrase in pro-Taiwan thinking. So Ma may be attempting to take some sort of conciliatory position here.

Finally, note that Ma talks of the ROC and Taiwan as two distinct but intertwined things. He reinforces that later by added Kinmen and Matsu to the homeland.

I am confident about Taiwan's future. Over the years, I have traveled to every corner of the island and talked with people from all walks of life. What impressed me most was that the traditional core values of benevolence, righteousness, diligence, honesty, generosity and industriousness could be seen everywhere in the words and deeds of the Taiwanese people regardless of their location and age. These values have long been ingrained in their character. This is the wellspring of our progress, also lauded as the "Taiwan Spirit."

One can see that Taiwan is blessed with an excellent geographic location, precious cultural assets, a maturing democracy, innovative entrepreneurship, a pluralistic society, active civic groups, patriotic overseas compatriots, and new immigrants from all over the world. We should couple the "Taiwan Spirit" with our comparative advantages and the principle of "putting Taiwan first for the benefit of the people." This way we can transform our homeland Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu the envy of the world.

Ma's definition of the homeland includes "Kinmen and Matsu." Here also the English text omits Ma's direct quote of the words the DPP used in the Feb 28, 2004 "Hands across Taiwan" event. Ma quotes the words from the key song, “Hand Holding hand, Heart United with Heart 心連心、手牽手” and then concludes, “let us all strive together 大家一起來奮鬥. Ma apparently repeated these words in Taiwanese too.

To revive Taiwan requires the efforts of both the government and the people. We need the expertise of the private sector, cooperation among all political parties, and participation by all the people. My dear compatriots, from this moment on, we must roll up our sleeves to build up our homeland. Together, we can lay a solid foundation of peace and prosperity for our children, grandchildren and the generations to come. Let's work hand in hand for our future!

My dear compatriots, please join me: Long live Taiwan's democracy! Long live the Republic of China! Thank you!

Once again, the reference to "revival" -- a core KMT talking point in the election. The reaction was, according to several news reports, wait-and-see. Jonathan Adams had a nifty piece in the Christian Science Monitor with some reactions, including crystal ball gazing on the subject of China:

On such issues, the extent of China's goodwill remains unclear. "The ball is in Beijing's court," says Lo Chih-cheng, a political scientist at Soochow University in Taipei. "Economic links can be resolved on the basis of the '92 consensus, but when it comes to issues of international space and a peace accord, I'm not sure if that will be good enough for Beijing."

57 comments:

Ma is showing his true colors faster than I expected. The sad thing is that I think many people still believe all the crap he spewed out during the campaign.

He has completely ditched Taiwan in his inaugural address.

However, my favorite bit is when he talks about the dangers of absolute power, and then implies that the KMT will be different. Um... how does that work? If absolute power corrupts absolutely, and if, as he tacitly acknowledges, the KMT is in a position of absolute power (he does so by indicating they will govern with dignity), then the only way for the KMT not to become utterly corrupted would be if it were not true that absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Absolute power makes people do bad things, we have absolute power, we won't do bad things. How does that work?

Are you aware that the presidential office dropped Taiwan from it Chinese banner an hour after Ma took office?

I was also struck by the roles of values in this speech. Ma essentially imputes generic Confucian values to the Taiwanese rather than liberal democratic values that underpin Taiwanese sovereignty and the principle that the Taiwanese must determine Taiwan's future. As the Liberty Times and other media observed, those concepts were conspicuously absent in his speech although they were prominent on the campaign trail.

Then later in the speech values come back.

In resolving cross-strait issues, what matters is not sovereignty but core values and way of life. We care about the welfare of the 1.3 billion people of mainland China, and hope that mainland China will continue to move toward freedom, democracy and prosperity for all the people. This would pave the way for the long-term peaceful development of cross-strait relations.

So sovereignty isn't important, but core values are. In the next sentence, Ma refers to democracy, freedom, and prosperity, but hasn't he just said that Taiwan's core values are the pseudo-Confucian ones he listed before? If so, one reading would be that the Taiwan and China already share core values, and that since sovereignty is not 'ultimately' important (as it reads in the Chinese, elided in the English), all that really separates Taiwan and China are 'way of life' issues--freedom, democracy , and prosperity?

Another key point where the Chinese has important nuances that were glossed over in the English was on defense:

We will rationalize our defense budget and acquire necessary defensive weaponry to form a solid national defense force.

What we read in the Chinese is that his administration will propose a reasonable defense budget ("合理的國防預算") and acquire "必要的防衛性武器."

The first translate suspiciously mangles the syntax of the Chinese and substitutes the neutral sounding 'rational' in English for the key word heli reasonable. In Chinese, the world reasonable often has a highly subjective sense, meaning something like 'what I find to be reasonable.' It was used constantly as an excuse when the KMT shot down defense budget after defense budget proposed by the DPP.

'Necessary' or biyao has a similar nuance in Chinese. It will be interesting indeed to find out what weapons the Ma administration and its panda-hugging National Security Council find reasonable, necessary, and defensive. Speculation is that only the P-3 anti-submarine aircraft budget is safe. No submarines, and Taiwan will demand F-16 planes at 'reasonable' prices.

Speaking of pandas, did everyone catch the dancing pandas along with all the Chinese opera themes at the inauguration? dq

Another thing that made me smirk was his comment that new democracies should uphold their existing constitutions rather than amending them. Apparently, he does not remember that the ROC constitution, whether it was candy coating or not at any time, is not a new constitution.

I guess it is also his view that the US should have stuck to the Articles of Confederation, or that France should not have written new constitutions when the First Empire ended, or when the Restoration ended or when the Second Empire ended or even when they began the Fourth Republic after Germany was defeated. Or when they decided to found a Fifth Republic in the 50s. The point is that constitutions are often imperfect and it sometimes takes a few tries to get them right. And sometimes they must suit the conditions of the present day.

But no! Back to the first one in 1791 for the Frenchies!

The only reason the US constitution has survived so long is because it is super simple. The state constitutions fill in the grey areas, and they are amended quite often. And the US constitution has been amended many times already.

But Taiwan, oh, excuse me, the ROC, the homeland of all "Zhonghua" people, although Ma would admit that it is a new democracy, should be following the constitution of a dictatorship that was a "republic" in name only.

You know, Taiwanese amaze me that they put up with this sort of stuff. The scary thing is that I have actually been told by one Taiwanese friend that I am not from there so would not understand. Sound familiar? Like what PRC peeps say all the time when you bring up one of the oddities of their country?

...In resolving cross-strait issues, what matters is not sovereignty...

I still can't get over this passage in the PandaMa speech. In 9 words, Ma Ying-jeou has publicly stated that he is ready to sacrifice Taiwanese autonomy, for "cross-strait issues" implicitly means "sovereignty". That is the primary contention between China and Taiwan, for goodness sakes!!

But now the Taiwanese live in a world where the word 'consensus' actually means disagreeing on a main principle.

Ma actually said these two things just moments apart:- - -Taiwan's democracy has been treading down a rocky road, but now it has finally won the chance to enter a smoother path. During that difficult time, political trust was low, political maneuvering was high, and economic security was gone. Support for Taiwan from abroad had suffered an all-time low.

[...]

We, the people of Taiwan, should be proud of ourselves. The Republic of China is now a democracy respected by the international community.- - -

Is he saying that this change happened in the first few minutes of his presidency?

And as I mentioned earlier via e-mail, Caroline Gluck fills in the blanks for Ma in calling Chen Shui-bian a "troublemaker":- - -In his inauguration speech, Mr Ma said he wanted a new dialogue with China, but denied he would enter reunification talks.

The softly-spoken [sic] politician has previously said he wants Taiwan to be regarded internationally as a responsible stakeholder and not a troublemaker.

The BBC's Caroline Gluck in Taipei says this is a dig at his predecessor, Mr Chen, whose strident pro-independence views not only angered China, but at times also strained relations with the island's most important ally, the US. - - -

Ma going back to Sun is an interesting tactic, though it basically airbrushes out the Taiwanese democracy movement -- or am I reading too much into it?

My grandpa used to say that Sun Yat-sen was the only person both followers of Mao AND followers of Chiang could admire, the only person who could be admired also by both mainland Chinese and Taiwanese. Sun the great common denominator. Ma riding on that to appear to be all happy things to all people?

Then again, this WAS an inaugural speech. It's partially meant to be programmatic, partially meant to be inspirational, and more partially meant to be the usual political hooey that sounds good and makes for pretty soundbites. It's policy that matters more than a speech, after all, so it's time for Ma-watching.

You've got good detail here. The speech was poorly written and I'll leave it at that, as I do not wish to decide what other people's ambitions are. Whether Ma can live up to his promises and ambitions remains to be seen, given his questionable power within his own party.

I think your translation of "中華民族" doesn't fully pickup the shade of distinction in Mandarin. While the direct translation is "Chinese Race", in Mandarin, this is a general and non-specific term that is commonly used to refer to nationalities and ethnic groups in China in general. If Ma had wanted to specifically refer to the Han people, he could have used any number of words (漢, or 華) that would exclude other ethnic groups. As such, I don't think Ma's comment about belonging to the Chinese race would, to a native Mandarin speaker, denote Han chauvinism. On the contrary, the deliberate use of such a general term would indicate a conscious effort to use a less controversial word.

I'm sorry... but an inaugural speech is usually written with the delicate precision of statecraft, as entire bodies of policy hang precariously from the nuance of each turn of phrase. If it is a case of a major speech merely being poorly written, then the Ma administration is already filled with servants of such staggering ineptitude and blind incompetence, they will make the past 8 years of DPP look like Kennedy's staff during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

I was in Taiwan during the election, on the east coast - in an Amis village - during the evening of the election everyone was sititng around the TV - most everyone 60 to 80 years old - not a single person in favor of Ma. It was obvious he was going to win - My understanding of Amis language is slim to none, however by the general unwinding of that night it was clear to me that many of the folks on east coast went home questioning the future...to say the least, anxiety in the air...

channing, I'm wondering whether Ma will be able to pass budgets without the legislative fiddling with them.

For example Jane's reported a few weeks ago that the legislative was working to block the submarine purchase plan. Sure the KMT weren't hot about it while they were in opposition but as far as I know they'll have money for it in the 2009 budget. Will the legislative throw its weight around and want to show it's not a rubber-stamping organisation? If so it will be an embarrassment for Ma if his plans are held up.

And that's just one issue - there might be other things too. Or will there be little scrutiny from the legislative now?

For example Jane's reported a few weeks ago that the legislative was working to block the submarine purchase plan. Sure the KMT weren't hot about it while they were in opposition but as far as I know they'll have money for it in the 2009 budget. Will the legislative throw its weight around and want to show it's not a rubber-stamping organisation? If so it will be an embarrassment for Ma if his plans are held up.

The KMT just announced a few hours again that they would probably not purchase the subs; they do want the F-16s. I just read the article, and freakin' lost it, of course. They have also started to roll back the changes made under Chen with names & stuff. ONly minor things now, but more on the way.

I think your translation of "中華民族" doesn't fully pickup the shade of distinction in Mandarin. While the direct translation is "Chinese Race", in Mandarin, this is a general and non-specific term that is commonly used to refer to nationalities and ethnic groups in China in general.

Right -- it assimilates a whole bunch of disparate ethnic groups under one ethnocultural banner -- it's an artificial colonial construct that is meant to obliterate cultural distinctions by swallowing them up in the Han. Ma confirms its use in this colonial/heirarchical way when they refer to "subethnic" groups.

Of course, this was not me, anon. When an aboriginal legislator who is PRO-KMT stomps out of the speech to denounce Ma, that simply confirms my diagnosis. Ma meant that the Han are on top -- and the LY rep sensed it.

For an American English teacher, you have an awful lot of political opinions on Taiwan. What do you think gives you such authority to comment on "what Taiwan should do"? Do you really think you know more, or have more at stake, than the majority KMT-voters that grew up here their entire lives?

If we go to the US and start advocating Hawaiian secession, how soon do you think the "free" and "democratic" Homeland Security is going to show up at our doors?

I don't know your background, but you seem too sophisticated to really buy this TI hooey (on the level of "We're invading Iraq to bring democracy"). Any connection to The National Endowment for Democracy?

to take the implications one step further... Ma's language makes it impossible for people who do not identify with the Chinese Nationalist definition of Chineseness to ever be equals in time and space. They will always be backward in light of Ma's modernity unless they are willing to assimilate. Even if they do assimilate, there will always be a gap. This group that is lacking includes Aborigines, Taiwanese, Southeast Asians and other foreigners and their children.

For an American English teacher, you have an awful lot of political opinions on Taiwan. What do you think gives you such authority to comment on "what Taiwan should do"? Do you really think you know more, or have more at stake, than the majority KMT-voters that grew up here their entire lives?

Sorry, when I came here, Customs didn't inform me I wasn't allowed to have opinions of my own. Can you forward me a copy of that regulation?

If we go to the US and start advocating Hawaiian secession, how soon do you think the "free" and "democratic" Homeland Security is going to show up at our doors?

I don't know; probably you should ask the perfectly legal Hawaii independence movement. Although it is heartening to see that you can clearly see China's annexation of Taiwan and the US annexation of Hawaii as equivalent and great historical wrongs.

Shut down all the departments in the world's universities that teach about anything other than the local. The irrational postivists have come to town and your are not allowed to know anything about anything unless you are X. Sorry dude, poor logic.

I don't agree with the translation of 中华民族 as "Han Chinese" and therefore excluding aboriginal Taiwanese. Although the effect is more or less the same, I think he is clearly using the term politically and not racially. 中华民族 refers to all the people/ethnicities of China (of which Han is clearly the most numerous ethnicity). The term references R.O.C. instead of the politically neutral 国民 ("citizens") and it is therefore used to drive home the message that Taiwanese are actually Chinese regardless of their ethnicity. Of course, this isn't going to resonate with an aboriginal population who have no ties (racial or political) to China.

As for "sub-ethnic groups"... The term that I saw in the speech is 族群. I'm not sure how that translates to "sub-ethnic groups".

Well, all I can say is that the official translation used "subethnicities" and that the use of Chunghwa minzu is widely perceived here to have been a loaded Han Chauvinist term. As I said, the whole idea that one becomes "Chinese" in the minzu sense by being a member of a multiethnic state is kind of ridiculous. The whole political thrust of chungahua minzu is that it subsumes all ethnicities into the definition of ethnicity as defined by the dominant political class. Ma could have chosen the ethnically neutral term "citizens" to emphasize that Taiwan is a democratic state, but instead he chose to make it an ethos-based state, and that state excludes people of differing ethos. That problem is exactly the same as that posed by the DPP's insistence on speaking Taiwanese: both formulations exclude people like me who might want to join such a state as a citizen, but not as a member of the "chunghuaminzu" (My kids are ROC citizens -- are they chunghuaminzu?") Until the KMT imagination embraces the idea of citizenship rather than "Chineseship" it will continue to face opposition from those of us with more inclusive and equality driven ideas about how society should be operated.

What about this comment? Do you think he means this in solely a "political" sense? (兩岸人民同屬中華民族). It is hard to see that comment as having anything other than an ethnic meaning, which effectively shows what Ma's use of the term 中華民族 really means.

I think Michael has it right. It may not be intentional on Ma's part, but Chinese nationalism is rooted in this type of thinking and bias. Read Presenjit Duara's excellent analysis on Chinese nationalism in Saving History from the Nation. Frank Dikotter also illuminates Chinese nationalist concepts of "Race" in The Concept of Race in Modern China. Furthermore, to back up Michael's position, read Steve Harrell's introduction and essays in Cultural Encounters on China's Ethnic Frontiers.

Both Chinese nationalisms are rooted in proprietary forms of Han ethnic chauvinism and seek to actively transform non-Han into something "better", but at the same time prevent them from attaining equality due to their ethnic identity.

Even the definitions of Chineseness have been constructed differently by the PRC and ROC... though they are still constructions and so the state is always setting the bar. Han=modern/advanced/correct. Other= lacking/backward/incorrect... but correctable.

This is what colonialism is about here folks. The "modern Chinese state" seeking to correct the defects in those they define as "other" and make them "modern". They can never become modern because then they wouldn't be "other" anymore. The unbridgeable threshold.

Do you really think you know more, or have more at stake, than the majority KMT-voters that grew up here their entire lives?

What a doofus statement.

I guess living here for 20+ years, having permanent residency, an established business and family here means nothing? Don't be such an a-hole. There are lots of expats here that are just as connected to Taiwan as you are.

The only reason we can't vote is that we have to give up our passports. On the other hand, Taiwanese can go to any other country and remain dual citizens. The Taiwan government holds a unfair double standard.

If it is a case of a major speech merely being poorly written, then the Ma administration is already filled with servants of such staggering ineptitude and blind incompetence, they will make the past 8 years of DPP look like Kennedy's staff during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

It is not only that the speech may be poorly written, but one would hope that Ma had the ability to see the flaws in the speech that he is presenting as his own views. From previous events that occurred during his presidential election, it seems like Ma is just a puppet saying what others want him to say.

I've been wanting to cry since the results came out and Ma was elected...I feel that "it's the end of the world/Taiwan as we know it" though many people have said that I'm too pessimistic and harsh. I guess all we can do is wait and see~

I think you are (mostly) right. And I think that Ma is trying to blur the distinctions to serve his political agenda. Moreover, I think you are going to see a lot of similar attempts to change the lexicon of the debate in the coming months and years. This is obviously a common political tactic in the States (e.g. “death taxes” or “pro-life”) but I think that it is especially powerful in Taiwan because many of the terms that will be resurrected were in common use during the years of martial law. This will make them detestable to some, but most may find these terms familiar and comfortable. It is hard to overstate the influence that language can have on the political debate and things will certainly change if the common vernacular ever allows your children to feel comfortable being called “chunghuaminzu.” As you are very much aware, there is no real difference at all between “chunghuaminzu” and “zhonghuaminzu”, and that is just fine with Ma.

By the way, is it possible for an American to become a citizen of Taiwan?

I think the issue is that Ma was trying to please everyone. He was clearly trying to please China and non-localisation KMT with the Zhonghua Minzu comment. You can't say that defining ethnicities that live in China or Taiwan as Zhonghua Minzu is not controversial because it implies Chinese culture and history, and there are ethnicities that may not want to take part. Imagine telling a Uighur that he is Zhonghua Minzu. Uighurs do not live in Taiwan, but the effect is the same. Why should an Ami have to be Zhonghua Minzu? Why should a Taiwanese, several generations removed from the mainland, who sees himself as distinct, have to be a Zhonghua Minzu? It is an expression of one culture claiming another.

I think Ma simply went overboard on the China pleasing in this department to the extent that he neglected the 40 percent of his own country's citizens who did not vote for him in favour of a rival, hostile government. This is a disturbing miscalculation in my mind because it shows Ma is not aware of what it takes to balance rival points of view from day 1.

In fact, in too many places in this speech, he panders to external forces over reducing tensions in his own country. Isn't this the man who is supposed to reunite Taiwan behind a common banner? Well he is totally incapable from the get go.

"For an American English teacher, you have an awful lot of political opinions on Taiwan. What do you think gives you such authority to comment on "what Taiwan should do"?

According to the Constitution of the Rep. of China (Taiwan), "People shall have freedom of speech, teaching, writing and publication" (Chapter II. Rights and Duties of the People, Article 11). For any local redneck, who still doesn't think this applies to you because of the color of your skin, etc., there is also this: "There shall be equality among the various racial groups IN the Republic of China" (Chapter I. General Provisions. Article 5). It doesn't matter if you know more or have more at stake. You can say or write whatever you want. If someone has a problem with that, let them &^%$ off to some other place.

By the way, is it possible for an American to become a citizen of Taiwan?

Yes, several adults have, and thousands of chidren have dual citizenship, including mine. But there's an interesting double standard... if I become a citizen of ROC, I have to give up my US citizenship. But ROC citizens born here do not have to.

Unfortunately the education system promotes/favors a selected version of an ethnic group at the expense of all others. Confucian values taught in school in Taiwan is like teaching Christian values in a US school. That is where the socializing starts.

I think if there's anyone that doesn't have a right to comment on Taiwan, it's people from China. All peoples have the right to self-determination, including Taiwan's. If Taiwan one day wants to unify with China, it's up to Taiwanese to decide. If Taiwan wants to remain independent, this is also up to the Taiwanese to decide.

"According to the Constitution of the Rep. of China (Taiwan), "People shall have freedom of speech, teaching, writing and publication" (Chapter II. Rights and Duties of the People, Article 11). For any local redneck….."

Patrick:

The issue of freedom of speech under both the USA constitution and the ROC constitution are extremely complicated and I fear that your citation to a seemingly simple provision of the ROC constitution will give some readers a dangerously simplistic impression of the defamation law in Taiwan. I'm no expert on Taiwan law but I think would be essentially correct to say that what constitutes protected speech in the USA is much broader than what constitutes protected speech in Taiwan. Rarely does anyone in the USA incur civil liability or jail time for something they say or write but, at least anecdotally, it seem to happens all the time in Taiwan. It even appears to me that some Taiwan politicians consider a libel conviction a sign of street credibiilty. Making a statement in public like "Dr. Smith is the worst dentist in Los Angeles" would hardly raise an eyebrow in Los Angeles but in Taiwan, Dr. Smith could sue you for libel and slander and refer you to the prosecutor's office for criminal action.

I don't care about Dr. Smith or defamation. They have nothing to do with the point I'm making - that "foreigners" have just as much right to an opinion as anyone else here in Taiwan. Sadly, it often comes down to xenophobic (or racist too) nonsense with people who argue otherwise.

It's interesting to me to see first or second-generation Americans of Taiwanese descent arguing that "foreigners" in Taiwan should not have the same rights as others.

What's even more interesting Patrick, is that there is an entire constituency of "Hua Qiao" living abroad, and many have never been to Taiwan, who have representatives in the LY. Taiwan's government spends millions of taxpayer's dollars (including foreign tax payers). Yet Foreigners living in Taiwan, raising Taiwanese children like Michael, have no one to represent their interests.

I am Taiwanese and have been deeply disturbed by Ma's speech. Not only did I totally disagree with the giving away the farm (sovernity) act, I was stunned by all the digs he gave DPP throughout his speech. He said he wanted a recounciliation but has actually antagonised the green supporters big time. It seems that his idea of 'reconsiliation' is that everyone just goes along with him or obeys him.

Between pleasing China and perhaps the US, is he ready to respect what Taiwanese really want and our rights? I can't deny that some people believe we can keep the status quo or become another Hong Kong (50 years of China's mercy) but there are a lot more who want to be able to make our own decisions and be ourselves.

Mr Hsieh actually said he would attend the inauguration if he was invited but Ma's invitation was just plain insincere. It looked like he considered himself superior and other people should see it as an honour to be there no matter what. Plus, Ma has gone back on almost every word he said during his campaign, proving Hsieh right, within just a few weeks (quite a record actually...) I'm toally OK with DPP figures not attending in protest. Apart from the two invitation cards with different seats assigned with no explanation sent to Hsieh, Ma claimed that he telephoned Hsieh himself on 18th May to invite Hsien to walk with him on the stage before his speech but couldn't reach Hsieh. Oh, please. If the invitation had been genuine (lets not forget this was his inauguration, not hanging out on Saturday night), would anyone phone an important guest less than 48 hours before to invite them? I give more notice than that for my dinner party! Sadly, this is how Ma plays the public and it's even sadder that some people actually buy it.

Sorry about all the whiging. I should thank you for all the info and effort you put in here. It's a pleasure reading your work :)

In the English version this is translated as 'sole ethnic Chinese' society. '華人' is also consistently translated as 'ethnic Chinese'. So why was 兩岸人民同屬中華民族 translated as "our common Chinese heritage"? Their ONLY common Chinese heritage is cultural. It is clear that Ma intends this not in a loose political sense but in a tight ethnic one, as the English translator repeatedly substitutes. As I note in the post far above this one, KMT Chairman Wu repeated that exact phrase on arrival in China.

It's not just me, but a large number of longtime Taiwan watchers who made this observation -- and then there was the aboriginal legislator who stamped out of the speech and called a press conference. D'ya think she didn't know what Ma meant?

Ma's comments also have to be seen in light of his references to Confucian values rather than liberal democratic values.

Ma forgets that HIS Chinese culture was codified by the Blue Shirt Movement in the 1930's. His common ethnicity is not shared by most people in China and Taiwan evenly or uniformly. Confucianism has been and is being practiced differently in many places and over the course of time things change. Myth making at it's best. I'd really like to get in his head and see how a man train in law at Harvard can make such leaps in logic.

My main point, which I think most native Mandarin speakers would agree with, is that the term "Zhonghua Minzu" is general and non-political enough that most (not all, apparently, but we'll go with the majority opinion since we all subscribe to democracy, right?) Mandarin speakers would find it entirely acceptable for Ma or Wu to use.

My second point is that you do not seem to understand the Chinese language well enough, or at least the nuances of certain words, to understand the situation. Your argument, the source of your indignation, relies on how a translator chose to translate certain words and ascribes intentional motivations as to the particular choice of wording to Ma/Wu. I would argue that the authoritative text (insofar as the audience's language is Mandarin) that should be analyzed is the Chinese version. And if you ask someone that understands Chinese (see More on the "Chinese People" thread), they probably wouldn't come to the same conclusions that you come to when you are reading a translated version of the original.

The idea and term "minzu" is loaded. It was originally invented by the Japanese following the invasion and colonization of Hokkaido Island. It was adopted by Chinese nationalists in the late 19th Century to express their concept of incorporating the peoples and vast territories of the Qing Empire while maintaining Han dominance. It is social-darwinist at its core and Han consider themselves "the fittest" and the most "modern". It burdens the "others" to change and it gives the government "science" to colonize them and change them. This is one of the big problems. It is very Chauvinistic and neglects, what is probably the most binding force of disparate peoples; the imagined community of shared values and the experience of the society (government, education, taxation, popular media etc...) from which people can be equal based on their experience rather than their "ethnicity".

12.50 anonymous seems to have hit it on the head, and still hasn't worked it out himself.""Zhonghua Minzu" is general and non-political enough that most (not all, apparently, but we'll go with the majority opinion since we all subscribe to democracy, right?) Mandarin speakers would find it entirely acceptable for Ma or Wu to use."That's true, most native speakers of Mandarin don't have a problem with the phrase. Problem is, nearly half of Taiwan aren't native speakers of Mandarin, and, you know, people were kind of hoping that Ma might try to appeal to all citizens of Taiwan. Vain hope.

Just wanted to remind everyone that President Lee REPEATEDLY used the same "Han chauvinist" language in his inaugural speeches, evoking images of "the glorious 5000 years of the Chinese race" (中華民族五千年優秀文化), that the mainland China and Taiwan were part of the same Chinese race (同樣是中華民族的一份子), and that he wanted to work with the mainland towards the prosperity of the Chinese race (共謀中華民族的繁榮與發展！)

President Chen similarly referred to Taiwan as a "Chinese society", calling his electoral victory a "milestone in Chinese societies worldwide" (更是全球華人社會劃時代的里程碑), wishes good health to the Chinese people on Taiwan and abroad (a similar blessing on other ethnic groups is conspicuously absent) (親愛的同胞，我們多麼希望海內外的華人都能親身體驗".

In his 2004 speech, he also refers to Taiwan as a paragon for Chinese societies worldwide " 對於華人社會以及其他的新興民主國家而言，台灣的民主不僅是一個試煉、也是一個示範"

In the same speech, President Chen also notes that the achievements by the people of Taiwan should be considered an asset for "Chinese societies and people on both sides of the strait"

Yes but Chen wasn't advancing a Han colonialist program, while Ma is. Plus Chen's rhetoric shifted by audience and by topic, as a new study out soon will show, and Chen/DPP policies were also non-chauvinist.

Photos on this blog are hosted by Flickr. I used to enthusiastically recommend Flickr but the new site changes have grievously impaired its usefulness. My current recommendation: find another photo host. My photos at Flickr. Just click on any photo to be taken to its Flickr page to view it in larger size.